ON TARGET: Criticism of NATO leaders is strangely muted

While it may be common practice for politicians to claim the moral high ground from which to point the finger of blame at a perceived foe, it is shameful when the media not only cede them that platform but then clamber up there themselves to add their own accusatory wagging digits.

To date, there is no conclusive proof that Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 was shot down by Russian troops or concrete evidence that Russia supplied Ukrainian rebels with the weapon system believed to be responsible for the tragedy. Nevertheless, within hours of the disaster, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird echoed other world leaders in directly blaming Russian President Vladimir Putin for what they claimed to be a mass murder of 298 innocent civilians.

The rash of editorial cartoons and commentary that followed these unproven allegations of Russian complicity would have one believe that Putin had deliberately fired that missile himself.

The cover of the Aug. 11 Maclean’s magazine depicted a sinister-looking Putin wearing sunglasses next to the headline “Getting away with murder: Vladimir Putin’s ambitions have now claimed the lives of 298 civilians. Why no one will stop him.”

However, with no smoking gun or telltale fingerprints to incriminate Putin directly, his accusers simply widened the nature of their allegations. Detractors argue that if Putin didn’t order the destruction of flight MH17 (and why on earth would he?), then he is still responsible for its fate because he initiated the destabilization of Ukraine. Case closed.

If that logic is to be followed, then we need only follow the bouncing ball back to last December, when pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych was still Ukraine’s elected leader. At that stage of the crisis, it was the U.S.-funded and supported pro-Western Ukrainian opposition that staged violent demonstrations in the streets of Kyiv. Those riots eventually toppled Yanukovych, and the subsequent power vacuum resulted in the current armed conflict in eastern Ukraine.

In other words, if starting the chaos in Ukraine means taking responsibility for the tragedy of flight MH17, then the guilt rests with U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, who openly admitted America’s role in financing the initial Ukrainian opposition.

Following Yanukovych’s ouster, Putin did deploy additional Russian troops into Crimea to secure Russia’s strategically vital Black Sea port in Sevastopol. This was achieved without a shot being fired, as the Ukraine military offered no resistance, with many of them actually volunteering to serve in the Russian military instead.

Then, in a hastily organized referendum, the ethnic Russian majority carried the vote in favour of ceding from Ukraine to formally join Russia. This annexation of Crimea was denounced by Harper and Baird as an invasion of Ukraine, with both men comparing Putin to Adolf Hitler.

Former U.S. secretary of state Hillary Clinton also fiercely chastised Putin and remarked that “You can’t just redraw the map of Europe.”

The irony of all this chest thumping over Putin’s blatant aggression is that NATO, under the guidance of Hillary’s hubby, Bill Clinton, redrew the map of Europe in 1999.

In the spring of that year, NATO, in violation of its own charter, which stipulates the alliance is not to be used in an offensive capacity against a third party, bombed Serbia for 78 days. That air campaign took the lives of over 1,200 innocent civilians and soundly downgraded the utilities, transportation and vital infrastructure throughout Serbia.

In the end, NATO ground troops occupied the provinces of Kosovo and Metohija, which the Albanian majority subsequently declared in 2008 to be the independent nation of Kosovo. From the moment NATO entered the territory, the U.S. began construction of a sprawling military compound, complete with its own airstrip, known as Camp Bondsteel.

Unlike the Russians in Crimea, who have had a major naval base at Sevastopol since the age of the czars, and who had a formal lease agreement in place with Ukraine until 2042, America did not have a major military presence in the Balkans. However, after bombing Serbia into submission, killing and wounding thousands of civilians in the process, and redrawing the map of Europe to suit its purpose, it does now.

The Albanians in Kosovo know exactly who they have to thank for their new state. Strolling through the capital city of Pristina, one can turn down Hillary Clinton Way, at the end of which is a seven-storey portrait of a smiling Bill Clinton.

For the U.S. to chastise Russia and to demonize Putin personally over Crimea reeks of hypocrisy. Add to Kosovo NATO’s bloody interventions in Afghanistan and Libya — both of which have produced failed states —and one has to wonder how NATO leaders have the gall to still claim the moral high ground on the Ukraine crisis.